[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] coroutine-sigaltstack: Keep SIGUSR2 handler up

From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coroutine-sigaltstack: Keep SIGUSR2 handler up
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 12:19:45 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0

On 1/22/21 11:58 AM, Max Reitz wrote:

>>> +    if (!self) {
>>> +        /*
>>> +         * This SIGUSR2 came from an external source, not from
>>> +         * qemu_coroutine_new(), so perform the default action.
>>> +         */
>>> +        exit(0);
>>> +    }
>> (2) exit() is generally unsafe to call in signal handlers.
>> We could reason whether or not it is safe in this particular case (POSIX
>> describes the exact conditions --
>> <https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/V2_chap02.html#tag_15_04_03_03>),
>> but it's much simpler to just call _exit().
>> (3) "Performing the default action" would be slightly different from
>> calling _exit(). When a process is terminated with a signal, the parent
>> can distinguish that, when reaping the child. See waitpid() /
>> So for the "default action", we'd have to:
>> - restore the SIGUSR2 handler to SIG_DFL, and
>> - re-raise the signal for the thread, and
>> - because the signal being handled is automatically blocked unless
>>    SA_NODEFER was set: unblock the signal for the thread.
>> The pthread_sigmask() call, made for the last step, would be the one
>> that would not return.
>> *However*, all of this complexity is not really useful here. We don't
>> really want to simulate being "forcefully terminated" by the unexpected
>> (asynchronous) SIGUSR2. We just want to exit.
>> Therefore, _exit() is fine. But, we should use an exit code different
>> from 0, as this is definitely not a pristine exit from QEMU. I'm not
>> sure if a convention exists for nonzero exit codes in QEMU; if not, then
>> just pass EXIT_FAILURE to _exit().
> I’m fine with calling _exit().  I hope, Eric is, too (as long as the
> comment no longer claims this were the default behavior).

Using _exit(nonzero) is fine by me as long as the comment is accurate.
There are signals like SIGINT where you really DO want to terminate by
signal rather than using _exit(SIGINT+128), because shells can tell the
difference [1]; but SIGUSR2 is not one of the signals where shells
special-case their behavior.

[1] https://www.cons.org/cracauer/sigint.html

> Given that SIGUSR2 is not something that qemu is prepared to receive
> from the outside, EXIT_FAILURE seems right to me.  (Even abort() could
> be justified, but I don’t think generating a core dump does any good here.)
> (As for qemu-specific exit code conventions, the only ones I know of are
> for certain qemu-img subcommands.  I’m sure you grepped, too, but I
> can’t find anything for the system emulator.)
>> (4) Furthermore, please update the comment, because "perform the default
>> action" is not precise.
> Sure, that’s definitely easier than to re-raise SIGUSR2.

Works for me as well.

Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3226
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]